No, it doesn't. Nibiru doesn't exist, and in fact the very definition of a rogue planet is in direct contradiction to "Nibiru." By definition a rogue planet does not orbit a star.

Quoting: Astromut

then you haven't heard all the theories about Nibiru. stop concentrating on Nancy.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

Nibiru is said to have a 3600 year orbit, it's nothing like a rogue planet. I'm going to play your game; I have no idea who this Nancy person is, but the theory didn't originate with them, people have been saying that for decades.

Sitchin's work doesn't rely on a brown-dwarf. Zecharia Sitchin posits the rogue-planet theory.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

No, he does not. Rogue planet does not mean a planet with a 3600 year orbit, it means a planet which does not orbit any star. It has nothing to do with the "Nibiru" claims, and I don't care who it comes from.

No, it doesn't. Nibiru doesn't exist, and in fact the very definition of a rogue planet is in direct contradiction to "Nibiru." By definition a rogue planet does not orbit a star.

Quoting: Astromut

then you haven't heard all the theories about Nibiru. stop concentrating on Nancy.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

Nibiru is said to have a 3600 year orbit, it's nothing like a rogue planet. I'm going to play your game; I have no idea who this Nancy person is, but the theory didn't originate with them, people have been saying that for decades.

Quoting: Astromut

Sitchin's work doesn't rely on a brown-dwarf. Zecharia Sitchin posits the rogue-planet theory.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

No, he does not. Rogue planet does not mean a planet with a 3600 year orbit, it means a planet which does not orbit any star. It has nothing to do with the "Nibiru" claims, and I don't care who it comes from.

Quoting: Astromut

don't argue sitchin with me, honey.

it goes back to the birth of our system. that's when Nibiru was captured by our system as a rogue planet.

you're the astronomer, you explain uranus on its side, and the chevron scar on miranda.

Don't call me "honey." And I'm not arguing "sitchin," I'm simply telling you that what he claimed is not a rogue planet by definition. A planet that orbits a star is not a rogue planet.

it goes back to the birth of our system. that's when Nibiru was captured by our system as a rogue planet.

Quoting: l'eft

Then it's no longer a rogue planet, it's a captured planet. Regardless of how the claim says it came to be here, it's not a rogue planet.

you're the astronomer, you explain uranus on its side, and the chevron scar on miranda.

Quoting: l'eft

Simple. The early solar system was a violent place with protoplanets colliding with each other. It does not require the presence of a "rogue planet" nor even a captured planet. Sedna may be an example of a captured planet, though it's only a dwarf planet.

Sitchin's "planetary collision" view does superficially resemble a theory by modern astronomers—the giant impact theory of the Moon's formation about 4.5 billion years ago by a body impacting with the newly-formed Earth. However, Sitchin's proposed series of rogue planetary collisions differ in both details and timing. As with Immanuel Velikovsky's earlier Worlds in Collision thesis, Sitchin states that he has found evidence of ancient human knowledge of rogue celestial motions in a variety of mythological accounts.

No, it doesn't. Nibiru doesn't exist, and in fact the very definition of a rogue planet is in direct contradiction to "Nibiru." By definition a rogue planet does not orbit a star.

Quoting: Astromut

then you haven't heard all the theories about Nibiru. stop concentrating on Nancy.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

Nibiru is said to have a 3600 year orbit, it's nothing like a rogue planet. I'm going to play your game; I have no idea who this Nancy person is, but the theory didn't originate with them, people have been saying that for decades.

Quoting: Astromut

Sitchin's work doesn't rely on a brown-dwarf. Zecharia Sitchin posits the rogue-planet theory.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

No, he does not. Rogue planet does not mean a planet with a 3600 year orbit, it means a planet which does not orbit any star. It has nothing to do with the "Nibiru" claims, and I don't care who it comes from.

Quoting: Astromut

don't argue sitchin with me, honey.

it goes back to the birth of our system. that's when Nibiru was captured by our system as a rogue planet.

you're the astronomer, you explain uranus on its side, and the chevron scar on miranda.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

Hello, idiot! My name is, Fact.

Stitchin is a fraud. He bases his "interpretations" off of a tablet that never existed in the first place, HONEY. Maybe YOU should go do your homework. Always, ALWAYS, when trying to discern what is fact: Take into account, all accounts. Look up Stitchiniswrong.something? Or, many other sources that prove that he is a fraud. FFS, You are an idiot.

Don't call me "honey." And I'm not arguing "sitchin," I'm simply telling you that what he claimed is not a rogue planet by definition. A planet that orbits a star is not a rogue planet.

it goes back to the birth of our system. that's when Nibiru was captured by our system as a rogue planet.

Quoting: l'eft

Then it's no longer a rogue planet, it's a captured planet. Regardless of how the claim says it came to be here, it's not a rogue planet.

you're the astronomer, you explain uranus on its side, and the chevron scar on miranda.

Quoting: l'eft

Simple. The early solar system was a violent place with protoplanets colliding with each other. It does not require the presence of a "rogue planet" nor even a captured planet. Sedna may be an example of a captured planet, though it's only a dwarf planet.

Quoting: Astromut

so, aside from his classification of it as a rogue star (which it was before capture, by your definition, so your point is moot), his theory is sound. MAY not be accurate, but possible, no?

then you haven't heard all the theories about Nibiru. stop concentrating on Nancy.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

Nibiru is said to have a 3600 year orbit, it's nothing like a rogue planet. I'm going to play your game; I have no idea who this Nancy person is, but the theory didn't originate with them, people have been saying that for decades.

Quoting: Astromut

Sitchin's work doesn't rely on a brown-dwarf. Zecharia Sitchin posits the rogue-planet theory.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

No, he does not. Rogue planet does not mean a planet with a 3600 year orbit, it means a planet which does not orbit any star. It has nothing to do with the "Nibiru" claims, and I don't care who it comes from.

Quoting: Astromut

don't argue sitchin with me, honey.

it goes back to the birth of our system. that's when Nibiru was captured by our system as a rogue planet.

you're the astronomer, you explain uranus on its side, and the chevron scar on miranda.

Quoting: Mordier L'eft

Hello, idiot! My name is, Fact.

Stitchin is a fraud. He bases his "interpretations" off of a tablet that never existed in the first place, HONEY. Maybe YOU should go do your homework. Always, ALWAYS, when trying to discern what is fact: Take into account, all accounts. Look up Stitchiniswrong.something? Or, many other sources that prove that he is a fraud. FFS, You are an idiot.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12053116

the only thing people like you toss around is heiser and his sitchiniswrong.com

the man is a known shill. show me these other "many" sources, other than heiser, please. and if they take the same "that's not what it means because my teacher told me so" position of heiser, don't bother then, either.